From a historical point of view, one may notice some similarity with the ideas developed by
de Broglie when he worked on a double solution theory [1]}, [2]}, which also involved a singular solution
localized at a precise point of configuration space. In GBC the singular
solution is replaced by a point \(P\) ,
and the two
variables \(\Psi \)  and \(P\)  do not obey the same equation. Otherwise they
constantly guide each other, the reaction of \(P\)  on \(\Psi \)  being
significant only during the resolutions of QSMDS. Another analogy can be found with the “shifty split” [3]} contained in the Copenhagen interpretation, i.e. the moveable split (or cut) between the quantum world of \(S\)  and the macroscopic world of measurement apparatuses \(M\) . We have seen that, because of the very rapid variation of the collapse time constant during the interaction between \(S\)  and \(M\) , the exact value of the constant \(\varepsilon \)  introduced in the localization term (REF ) is not so important: changing \(\varepsilon \)  shifts the time at which the sudden collapse occurs, but the change is only very small, so that a large range of values provides physically acceptable results. In other words, we can arbitrarily move the split, or cut, between the two worlds without changing much the predictions of the model.
